DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
2. A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 05/07/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
3. This is an office action in response to Applicant's arguments and remarks filed on 05/07/2026. Claims 1-3, 7-12, 14-16, and 20-27 are pending in the application. Claims 26-27 have been withdrawn and claims 1-3, 7-12, 14-16, and 20-25 are being examined herein.
Status of Objections and Rejections
4. All rejections from the previous office action are withdrawn in view of Applicant's amendment.
New grounds of rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 are necessitated by the amendments.
Response to Arguments
5. In the arguments presented on p.12-21 of the amendment, the Applicant argues that the claim 1 limitation of a “heat conductive layer to conduct heat generated by the array of LEDs in the first direction” is rejected through hindsight, because the prior art teaches dissipation of heat away from the surface to be sterilized, not towards it.
In response to applicant's argument that the examiner's conclusion of obviousness is based upon improper hindsight reasoning, it must be recognized that any judgment on obviousness is in a sense necessarily a reconstruction based upon hindsight reasoning. But so long as it takes into account only knowledge which was within the level of ordinary skill at the time the claimed invention was made, and does not include knowledge gleaned only from the applicant's disclosure, such a reconstruction is proper. See In re McLaughlin, 443 F.2d 1392, 170 USPQ 209 (CCPA 1971).
Furthermore, the Applicant argues that the amended claim 1 limitations are not taught by primary reference Russell, alone or in combination. Specifically, Russell teaches maintaining a temperature below a threshold rather than at or above a specific temperature, and one of ordinary skill would not look to utilizing UV wavelengths of 200-280 nm to provide a therapeutic effect (i.e., UV-C radiation is harmful to humans).
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 and 14 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Election/Restrictions
6. Newly submitted claims 26-27 are directed to an invention that is independent or distinct from the invention originally claimed for the following reasons:
The Invention of claims 1-3, 7-12, 14-16, and 20-25 and the Invention of claims 26-27 are related as product and process of use. The inventions can be shown to be distinct if either or both of the following can be shown: (1) the process for using the product as claimed can be practiced with another materially different product or (2) the product as claimed can be used in a materially different process of using that product. See MPEP § 806.05(h). In the instant case the product as claimed can be used in a materially different process of using that product such as a method of disinfecting a space and not a surface.
Since applicant has received an action on the merits for the originally presented invention, this invention has been constructively elected by original presentation for prosecution on the merits. Accordingly, claims 26-27 are withdrawn from consideration as being directed to a non-elected invention. See 37 CFR 1.142(b) and MPEP § 821.03.
To preserve a right to petition, the reply to this action must distinctly and specifically point out supposed errors in the restriction requirement. Otherwise, the election shall be treated as a final election without traverse. Traversal must be timely. Failure to timely traverse the requirement will result in the loss of right to petition under 37 CFR 1.144. If claims are subsequently added, applicant must indicate which of the subsequently added claims are readable upon the elected invention.
Should applicant traverse on the ground that the inventions are not patentably distinct, applicant should submit evidence or identify such evidence now of record showing the inventions to be obvious variants or clearly admit on the record that this is the case. In either instance, if the examiner finds one of the inventions unpatentable over the prior art, the evidence or admission may be used in a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) of the other invention.
Priority
7. The Applicant’s claims the benefit of a prior-filed PCT Application PCT/US2021/048696, which claims the benefit of a prior-filed U.S. provisional Application 63/073,179.
The disclosure of the prior-filed provisional U.S. Application 63/073,179 fails to provide adequate support or enablement in the manner provided by 35 U.S.C. 112(a) for one or more claims in this application.
Since claims 1-3, 7-12, 14-16, and 20-25 contain language that does not appear to be supported by provisional U.S. Application 63/073,179, these claims do not receive the earlier filing date and will be examined based on the filing date of the prior-filed PCT Application PCT/US2021/048696.
Claims 1 and 14 recite “wherein the flexible cover layer comprises a plurality of projections configured to maintain a consistent distance between the array of LEDs and a surface to be disinfected, wherein each of the plurality of projections comprises a hollow cavity”.
The remaining dependent claims fail to cure the issue of support.
Because the provisional parent application preceding this application does not disclose the features recited supra as set forth in the claims of the instant invention, applicant only has priority for claims 1-3, 7-12, 14-16, and 20-25 back to the filing date of the PCT Application PCT/US2021/048696 filed on 09/01/2021.
Claim Objections
8. Claim 20 objected to because of the following informalities: in line 12, “th3” is not a word and should be “the”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
9. The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
10. Claims 1-3, 7, and 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over De Kok (US 20090204185 A1), further in view of Russell (US 6290713 B1, cited in prior office action), further in view of Tasaki (US 20230251477 A1), further in view of Hayashi et al. (CN 105209570 A).
De Kok teaches a decontamination apparatus (Fig. 5), comprising:
a flexible substrate (textile/substrate 15, Fig. 5) having a first side facing a first direction (direction away from the patient, Fig. 1 and 5) and a second side facing a second direction opposite the first direction (direction facing the patient, Fig. 1 and 5);
an array of LEDs arranged on the first side of the flexible substrate (14 and 20, Fig. 5, where the light sources can be LEDs, [0042]), the array of LEDs configured to output radiation in at least two separate wavelength ranges, the at least two separate wavelength ranges corresponding to an ultraviolet radiation range of 200 to 280 nanometers ([0016] and for disinfection, [0029]) and an infrared radiation range of 700 to 1000 nanometers ([0016]),
a processor (control unit 11, Fig. 5 and [0041]) operationally coupled to the array of LEDs and configured to control the output of radiation therefrom ([0040]); and
a flexible cover layer covering the array of LEDs (attachment medium 16, Fig. 5), the flexible cover layer being transparent to at least the radiation in the ultraviolet radiation range (“means of a diffuser in order to achieve a continuous light intensity”, [0042] and see [0038]),
wherein the flexible textile, the array of LEDs, and the flexible cover layer are coupled together to form a flexible blanket (1, Fig. 5) that conforms to a contour of the surface to be disinfected (skin 4, Fig. 1).
De Kok fails to teach wherein the flexible substrate includes a reflective layer arranged to reflect the radiation output from the array of LEDs such that the radiation is output in the first direction and is inhibited from being output in the second direction, and wherein the flexible blanket further comprises a heat conductive layer to conduct heat generated by the array of LEDs in the first direction in order to provide a consistent temperature across the decontamination apparatus. It is important to note that De Kok’s patient skin temperature data from the sensor (21, Fig. 5) is utilized to automatically control the output of radiation of both the UV and IR light sources ([0040]) via a feedback mechanism from the temperature data to the control unit ([0040]).
Russell teaches a phototherapy apparatus (illuminator 30, Fig. 2), comprising: a flexible substrate (the illuminator has a substrate having at least one electrically-powered light-generating source thereon… The preferred embodiment is a flexible substrate”, col. 7, lines 55-63, see drawing below);
PNG
media_image1.png
222
747
media_image1.png
Greyscale
having a first side facing a first direction (front surface 71, Fig. 6, to which hereinafter “FIGS. 6-7 illustrate the internal construction of an exemplary illuminator similar to that shown in FIG. 2”, col. 12, lines 35-36) and a second side facing a second direction opposite the first direction (back cover 96, Fig. 7); an array of LEDs arranged on the first side of the flexible substrate (array of light sources 76 on layer 84, Fig. 6, where “The light-generating source preferably is a light-emitting diode (LED)”, col. 9, line 11),
wherein the flexible substrate includes a reflective layer arranged to reflect the radiation output from the array of LEDs such that the radiation is output in the first direction and is inhibited from being output in the second direction (reflector 85, Fig. 7, see col. 8, 2nd paragraph and col. 10, lines 50-55),
a flexible cover layer arranged to encase the array of LEDs on the first side (front cover layer 72, Fig. 6), wherein the flexible substrate includes a heat conductive layer to conduct heat generated by the array of LEDs in the first direction (cooling channels 80 are directly adjacent to light sources 76 that emit radiation in said first direction, Fig. 6-7).
De Kok and Russell are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of phototherapy devices utilizing LEDs of multiple wavelengths.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the phototherapy device of De Kok by incorporating a reflective layer on the substrate surrounding the LEDs and a heat-conductive cooling channel network directly adjacent to the LEDs as taught by Russell because in doing so would one, “redirect a portion of the light emitted by a light source away from the patient and towards the interface or substrate so that it may ultimately be redirected towards a more desirable location” (Russell, col. 10, lines 50-55), and two, conduct heat generated by the array of LEDs (Russell) and predictably provide an additional means of patient skin temperature control (De Kok, [0040]).
The De Kok/Russell combination teaches wherein the processor controls the output of radiation from the array of LEDs (De Kok, [0040]), but fails to teach wherein the processor controls the output of radiation to maintain a surface temperature of the surface to be disinfected to be at least 45 degrees Celsius. It is important to note that there is no specific temperature range that De Kok’s control unit tries to maintain, and thus is silent to said range.
Hayashi teaches a UV LED array for the disinfection of fluid (Fig. 12a-b) controlled by a control unit (p.14, 1st paragraph of English translation), where the UV LEDs are mounted on a heat-conductive layer acting as a heat sink (MCPCB layer 104, Fig. 12b), stating that the UV LEDs have an optimal and most efficient working temperature range of 20-60°C (p.14, 2nd paragraph of English translation).
The De Kok/Russell combination and Hayashi are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of temperature regulation of the UV LEDs for disinfection.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the cooling channels of Russell and temperature sensors connected the control unit of De Kok of the De Kok/Russell combination by incorporating an optimal working temperature of the LEDs such as 45°C from the 20-60°C range as taught by Hayashi, because in doing so would provide the most optimal working temperature for the UV LEDs in the apparatus, thus increasing its efficiency (Hayashi, p.14, 2nd paragraph of English translation).
Modified De Kok teaches a flexible cover layer (attachment medium 16, Fig. 5), but fails to teach wherein the flexible cover layer comprises a plurality of projections configured to maintain a consistent distance between the array of LEDs and a surface to be disinfected, wherein each of the plurality of projections comprises a hollow cavity.
Tasaki teaches an optical member (2, Fig. 1a-f) attached to an LED emitting UV radiation (for disinfection, [0082]) up to IR radiation ([0081]), citing a hemispheric lens as an option (which is a hollow, spherical lens, [0061]) in order to “collect, scatter, diffuse or guide light from the ultraviolet LED” ([0057]).
Modified De Kok and Tasaki are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of LEDs for disinfection.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the attachment medium of modified De Kok with a hemispheric lens as taught by Tasaki because the substitution of this feature yields the same predictable result of light diffusion (Tasaki, [0057]).
Regarding claim 2, the instant combination teaches wherein the flexible substrate (De Kok, 15, Fig. 5) includes a textile layer (De Kok, [0038]), the array of LEDs being arranged between the textile layer and the reflective layer (Russell, 85, Fig. 7).
Regarding claim 3, the instant combination teaches wherein the reflective layer (Russell, 85, Fig. 7) defines a plurality of apertures (Russell, slots for the light sources 76 on reflector 85, Fig. 7), each of the LEDs in the array of LEDs being arranged within one of the plurality of apertures (De Kok, LEDs, [0042], where the reflector layer 85 of Russell surrounds the light sources 76 in Fig. 7).
Regarding claim 7, modified De Kok teaches a temperature sensor (21, Fig. 5) arranged on the flexible substrate (5, Fig. 5) and operationally coupled to the processor (control unit 11, Fig. 7), wherein the processor controls the output of radiation based on a temperature signal received from the temperature sensor ([0040]).
Regarding claim 11, modified De Kok teaches wherein the processor controls the output of radiation by sequentially outputting radiation in the at least two separate wavelength ranges ([0012]).
Regarding claim 12, modified De Kok teaches wherein the processor controls the output of radiation by simultaneously outputting radiation in the at least two separate wavelength ranges ([0012]).
11. Claims 23-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over De Kok (US 20090204185 A1), further in view of Russell (US 6290713 B1), further in view of Tasaki (US 20230251477 A1), further in view of Hayashi et al. (CN 105209570 A), as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of Bettles et al. (US 20140264076 A1, cited in prior office action).
Regarding claim 8, modified De Kok teaches a flexible substrate (15, Fig. 5);
with LEDs (14 and 20, Fig. 5) controlled by a processor (control unit 11, Fig. 5), but fails to teach a proximity sensor operationally coupled to the processor, wherein the processor deactivates the array of LEDs to stop the output of radiation when the proximity sensor detects a user within a proximity of the proximity sensor.
Bettles teaches a flexible UV device (Fig. 2), having a flexible substrate (2, Fig. 2), LEDs (UV radiation sources 18, Fig. 2, where “the ultraviolet radiation source 18 can include a high intensity ultraviolet lamp (e.g., a high intensity mercury lamp), an ultraviolet light emitting diode (LED)”, [0027]), and a processing unit (control system 16, Fig. 6, where Fig. 6 is a block diagram for the flexible substrate having a UV system). Bettles further teaches a sensing device (sensing device 38, Fig. 6, where “A sensing device 38 can include a sensor and/or a switch 38 to sense that an opening of the enclosure 14 is physically closed before the monitoring and/or control system 16 turns on the ultraviolet radiation source(s) 18.
Furthermore, the sensing device 38 can sense that biological activity (i.e., target bacteria) is present within the enclosure 14 before the monitoring and/or control system 16 turns on the ultraviolet radiation source(s) 18”, [0042]) on the flexible substrate (2, Fig. 2) in order to “avoid harming the user” ([0035]), user being the person that is using the UV device on the target.
Modified De Kok and Bettles are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of flexible substrates having LEDs emitting therapeutic/disinfecting wavelengths.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the flexible substrate of modified De Kok by incorporating a sensing device such as a proximity sensor as taught by Bettles in order to check to see if the user is not near or in the enclosure (Bettles, [0042]) and to avoid harming the user (Bettles, [0035]).
Regarding claim 9, modified De Kok teaches a flexible substrate (15, Fig. 5);
with LEDs (14 and 20, Fig. 5) controlled by a processor (control unit 11, Fig. 5), but fails to teach an image sensor operationally coupled to the processor, wherein the processor determines a type of the surface to be disinfected based on an image signal received from the image sensor.
Bettles teaches a flexible UV device (Fig. 2), having a flexible substrate (2, Fig. 2), LEDs (UV radiation sources 18, Fig. 2, where “the ultraviolet radiation source 18 can include a high intensity ultraviolet lamp (e.g., a high intensity mercury lamp), an ultraviolet light emitting diode (LED)”, [0027]), and a processing unit (control system 16, Fig. 6, where Fig. 6 is a block diagram for the flexible substrate having a UV system). Bettles further teaches an image sensor operationally coupled to the processor (sensing devices 38 coupled to control system 16, Fig. 6), wherein the processor determines a type of a surface to be disinfected based on an image signal received from the image sensor (“the sensing devices 38 include at least one of a visual camera or a chemical sensor… For example, when the monitoring and/or control system 16 is operating the ultraviolet radiation source 18, a visual camera and/or a chemical sensor 38 monitoring an interior of the enclosure 14 may be operated to detect the presence of microorganisms. In a specific embodiment, the visual camera 38 comprises a fluorescent optical camera that can detect bacteria and/or viruses that become fluorescent under ultraviolet radiation”, [0044] and Fig. 6) on the flexible substrate (2, Fig. 2) in order to detect the presence of microorganisms, specifically pathogens fluorescing under UV radiation from light sources (18, Fig. 2, see [0044]).
Modified De Kok and Bettles are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of flexible substrates having LEDs emitting therapeutic/disinfecting wavelengths.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the flexible substrate of modified De Kok by incorporating a sensing device such as an image sensor (i.e., visual camera) as taught by Bettles in order to check to see if the object/surface being disinfected contains microorganisms (Bettles, [0044]).
Regarding claim 10, modified De Kok teaches a flexible substrate (15, Fig. 5);
with LEDs (14 and 20, Fig. 5) controlled by a processor (control unit 11, Fig. 5), but fails to teach an image sensor operationally coupled to the processor, wherein the processor: (i) determines a type of pathogen on the surface to be disinfected based on an image signal received from the image sensor, and (ii) controls the output of radiation based on the determined type of pathogen.
Bettles teaches a flexible UV device (Fig. 2), having a flexible substrate (2, Fig. 2), LEDs (UV radiation sources 18, Fig. 2, where “the ultraviolet radiation source 18 can include a high intensity ultraviolet lamp (e.g., a high intensity mercury lamp), an ultraviolet light emitting diode (LED)”, [0027]), and a processing unit (control system 16, Fig. 6, where Fig. 6 is a block diagram for the flexible substrate having a UV system). Bettles further teaches an image sensor operationally coupled to the processor (sensing devices 38 coupled to control system 16, Fig. 6), wherein the processor: (i) determines a type of pathogen on a surface to be disinfected based on an image signal received from the image sensor (“the sensing devices 38 include at least one of a visual camera or a chemical sensor… For example, when the monitoring and/or control system 16 is operating the ultraviolet radiation source 18, a visual camera and/or a chemical sensor 38 monitoring an interior of the enclosure 14 may be operated to detect the presence of microorganisms. In a specific embodiment, the visual camera 38 comprises a fluorescent optical camera that can detect bacteria and/or viruses that become fluorescent under ultraviolet radiation”, [0044] and Fig. 6, where fluorescing pathogens are a type of pathogen), and
(ii) controls the output of radiation based on the determined type of pathogen in order to detect the presence of microorganisms (“the sensing devices 38 can sense locations of higher levels of biological activity on specific items 8 within the enclosure 14, and the ultraviolet radiation source 18 can be configured by the monitoring and/or control system 16 to direct higher doses (by increasing intensity or exposure), [0045] and Fig. 6), specifically pathogens fluorescing under UV radiation from light sources (18, Fig. 2, see [0044]).
Modified De Kok and Bettles are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of flexible substrates having LEDs emitting therapeutic/disinfecting wavelengths.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the flexible substrate of modified De Kok by incorporating a sensing device such as an image sensor (i.e., fluorescent optical camera) as taught by Bettles in order to check to see if the object/surface being disinfected contains fluorescing microorganisms (from UV radiation) and adjust the light sources accordingly (Bettles, [0044-0046]).
12. Claims 14 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over De Kok (US 20090204185 A1), further in view of Russell (US 6290713 B1), further in view of Tasaki (US 20230251477 A1).
Regarding claim 14, De Kok teaches a decontamination apparatus (Fig. 5), comprising:
a flexible textile (textile/substrate 15, Fig. 5) having a first side facing a first direction (direction away from the patient, Fig. 1 and 5) and a second side facing a second direction opposite the first direction (direction facing the patient, Fig. 1 and 5);
an array of LEDs (14 and 20, Fig. 5, where the light sources can be LEDs, [0042]) configured to output radiation in at least two separate wavelength ranges, the at least two separate wavelength ranges corresponding to an ultraviolet radiation range of 200 to 280 nanometers ([0016] and for disinfection, [0029]) and an infrared radiation range of 700 to 1000 nanometers ([0016]), the array of LEDs coupled to the textile such that the radiation is output in the first direction and is inhibited from being output in the second direction (radiation arrows, Fig. 5 in the second/downward-facing direction); and
a flexible cover layer covering the array of LEDs (attachment medium 16, Fig. 5), the flexible cover layer being transparent to at least the radiation in the ultraviolet radiation range (“means of a diffuser in order to achieve a continuous light intensity”, [0042] and see [0038]),
wherein the flexible textile, the array of LEDs, and the flexible cover layer are coupled together to form a flexible blanket (1, Fig. 5) that conforms to a contour of the surface to be disinfected (skin 4, Fig. 1).
De Kok fails to teach wherein the flexible blanket further comprises a heat conductive layer to conduct heat generated by the array of LEDs in the first direction in order to provide a consistent temperature across the decontamination apparatus. It is important to note that De Kok’s patient skin temperature data from the sensor (21, Fig. 5) is utilized to automatically control the output of radiation of both the UV and IR light sources ([0040]). While not explicitly stated, it is heavily implied that, when applying the combined radiation to a user, the temperature data controls the output of radiation such that the temperature of the skin does not exceed or drop below a patient’s safe/comfortable range ([0040]).
Russell teaches a phototherapy apparatus (illuminator 30, Fig. 2), comprising: a flexible substrate (the illuminator has a substrate having at least one electrically-powered light-generating source thereon… The preferred embodiment is a flexible substrate”, col. 7, lines 55-63, see drawing below);
PNG
media_image1.png
222
747
media_image1.png
Greyscale
having a first side facing a first direction (front surface 71, Fig. 6, to which hereinafter “FIGS. 6-7 illustrate the internal construction of an exemplary illuminator similar to that shown in FIG. 2”, col. 12, lines 35-36) and a second side facing a second direction opposite the first direction (back cover 96, Fig. 7); an array of LEDs arranged on the first side of the flexible substrate (array of light sources 76 on layer 84, Fig. 6, where “The light-generating source preferably is a light-emitting diode (LED)”, col. 9, line 11), a flexible cover layer arranged to encase the array of LEDs on the first side (front cover layer 72, Fig. 6), wherein the flexible substrate includes a heat conductive layer to conduct heat generated by the array of LEDs in the first direction (cooling channels 80 are directly adjacent to light sources 76 that emit radiation in said first direction, Fig. 6-7).
De Kok and Russell are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of phototherapy devices utilizing LEDs of multiple wavelengths.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the phototherapy device of De Kok by incorporating a heat-conductive cooling channel network directly adjacent to the LEDs as taught by Russell because in doing so would conduct heat generated by the array of LEDs (Russell) and predictably provide an additional means of patient skin temperature control (De Kok, [0040]).
Modified De Kok teaches a flexible cover layer (attachment medium 16, Fig. 5), but fails to teach wherein the flexible cover layer comprises a plurality of projections configured to maintain a consistent distance between the array of LEDs and a surface to be disinfected, wherein each of the plurality of projections comprises a hollow cavity.
Tasaki teaches an optical member (2, Fig. 1a-f) attached to an LED emitting UV radiation (for disinfection, [0082]) up to IR radiation ([0081]), citing a hemispheric lens as an option (which is a hollow, spherical lens, [0061]) in order to “collect, scatter, diffuse or guide light from the ultraviolet LED” ([0057]).
Modified De Kok and Tasaki are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of LEDs for disinfection.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the attachment medium of modified De Kok with a hemispheric lens as taught by Tasaki because the substitution of this feature yields the same predictable result of light diffusion (Tasaki, [0057]).
Regarding claim 22, modified De Kok teaches (i) a processor (controller 11 being a microprocessor, Fig. 5 and [0041]) operationally coupled to the array of LEDs and configured to control the output of radiation therefrom ([0028]), and (ii) a temperature sensor arranged on the flexible substrate (21, Fig. 5) and operationally coupled to the processor ([0028]), wherein the processor controls the output of radiation based on a temperature signal received from the temperature sensor (“The sensor unit 21 is adapted to obtain patient condition data, e.g. the skin temperature at the entrance site. Temperature data are transmitted to the control unit 11, which switches the combined light emitter/light source components 10, 20 between near infrared light (arrows) and UV light”, [0028]).
13. Claims 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over De Kok (US 20090204185 A1), further in view of Russell (US 6290713 B1), further in view of Tasaki (US 20230251477 A1), as applied to claim 14 above, further in view of Bembridge et al. (US 20140128942 A1, cited in prior office action).
Regarding claim 15, modified De Kok teaches a flexible textile (subcarrier/textile layer 15, Fig. 5);
with LEDs arranged on the textile layer (14 and 20, Fig. 5), but fails to teach two textile layers wherein the array of LEDs is arranged between the two textile layers.
Bembridge teaches a phototherapy device (1, Fig. 1-2) having a flexible pad (2, Fig. 1-2) to which “the flexible pad may also be provided with a thermoformed 3D nanosphere® textile which has the advantage of creating a water repellent and easily cleanable surface e.g. for proper hygiene after use of the light-emitting device at the skin” ([0013]) with a light source having a textile base (light source 16, Fig. 2, where “the circular recesses are replaced by conical apertures 6 engaging with light-emitting elements 16 from a light-emitting module 17 at the back of the flexible pad (shown in FIG. 2) such as for example LEDs mounted on an electronic textile”, [0027] and Fig. 2).
Modified De Kok and Bembridge are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of flexible substrates having LEDs emitting therapeutic/disinfecting wavelengths.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the one flexible textile layer housing LEDs emitting UV and IR wavelengths taught by modified De Kok by incorporating an outer textile layer such as a thermoformed textile as taught by Bembridge in order to create a water repellent and easily cleanable surface after use (Bembridge, [0013]).
Regarding claim 16, the instant combination teaches wherein a first textile layer (De Kok, 15, Fig. 5) of the two textile layers (Bembridge, see claim 15 rejection above) defines a plurality of apertures (De Kok, apertures/slots for light sources 14 and 20 to fit on, Fig. 5), each of the LEDs in the array of LEDs being arranged within one of the plurality of apertures (De Kok, Fig. 5).
14. Claim 20 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over De Kok (US 20090204185 A1), further in view of Russell (US 6290713 B1), further in view of Tasaki (US 20230251477 A1), as applied to claim 14 above, further in view of Hayashi et al. (CN 105209570 A), further in view of Bettles et al. (US 20140264076 A1, cited in prior office action).
The De Kok/Russell/Tasaki combination teaches a processor (De Kok, control unit 11, Fig. 5) operationally coupled to the array of LEDs (De Kok, 14 and 20, Fig. 5) and configured to control the output of radiation therefrom (De Kok, [0040]); a temperature sensor operationally coupled to the processor (De Kok, 21, Fig. 5), wherein the processor: (i) controls the output of radiation based on a temperature signal received from the temperature sensor (De Kok, [0040]), but fails to teach wherein the processor controls the output of radiation to maintain a surface temperature of the surface to be disinfected to be at least 45 degrees Celsius. It is important to note that there is no specific temperature range that De Kok’s control unit tries to maintain, and thus is silent to said range.
Hayashi teaches a UV LED array for the disinfection of fluid (Fig. 12a-b) controlled by a control unit (p.14, 1st paragraph of English translation), where the UV LEDs are mounted on a heat-conductive layer acting as a heat sink (MCPCB layer 104, Fig. 12b), stating that the UV LEDs have an optimal and most efficient working temperature range of 20-60°C (p.14, 2nd paragraph of English translation).
The De Kok/Russell/Tasaki combination and Hayashi are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of temperature regulation of the UV LEDs for disinfection.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the cooling channels of Russell and temperature sensors connected the control unit of De Kok of the De Kok/Russell/Tasaki combination by incorporating an optimal working temperature of the LEDs such as 45°C from the 20-60°C range as taught by Hayashi, because in doing so would provide the most optimal working temperature for the UV LEDs in the apparatus, thus increasing its efficiency (Hayashi, p.14, 2nd paragraph of English translation).
Modified De Kok teaches a flexible substrate (15, Fig. 5);
with LEDs (14 and 20, Fig. 5) controlled by a processor (control unit 11, Fig. 5), but fails to teach, one, a proximity sensor operationally coupled to the processor, wherein the processor deactivates the array of LEDs to stop the output of radiation when the proximity sensor detects a user within a proximity of the proximity sensor, and two, an image sensor operationally coupled to the processor, wherein the processor determines a type of the surface to be disinfected based on an image signal received from the image sensor.
Bettles teaches a flexible UV device (Fig. 2), having a flexible substrate (2, Fig. 2), LEDs (UV radiation sources 18, Fig. 2, where “the ultraviolet radiation source 18 can include a high intensity ultraviolet lamp (e.g., a high intensity mercury lamp), an ultraviolet light emitting diode (LED)”, [0027]), and a processing unit (control system 16, Fig. 6, where Fig. 6 is a block diagram for the flexible substrate having a UV system). Bettles further teaches a sensing device (sensing device 38, Fig. 6, where “A sensing device 38 can include a sensor and/or a switch 38 to sense that an opening of the enclosure 14 is physically closed before the monitoring and/or control system 16 turns on the ultraviolet radiation source(s) 18.
Furthermore, the sensing device 38 can sense that biological activity (i.e., target bacteria) is present within the enclosure 14 before the monitoring and/or control system 16 turns on the ultraviolet radiation source(s) 18”, [0042]) on the flexible substrate (2, Fig. 2) in order to “avoid harming the user” ([0035]), user being the person that is using the UV device on the target.
Modified De Kok and Bettles are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of flexible substrates having LEDs emitting therapeutic/disinfecting wavelengths.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the flexible substrate of modified De Kok by incorporating a sensing device such as a proximity sensor as taught by Bettles in order to check to see if the user is not near or in the enclosure (Bettles, [0042]) and to avoid harming the user (Bettles, [0035]).
Bettles further teaches an image sensor operationally coupled to the processor (sensing devices 38 coupled to control system 16, Fig. 6), wherein the processor determines a type of a surface to be disinfected based on an image signal received from the image sensor (“the sensing devices 38 include at least one of a visual camera or a chemical sensor… For example, when the monitoring and/or control system 16 is operating the ultraviolet radiation source 18, a visual camera and/or a chemical sensor 38 monitoring an interior of the enclosure 14 may be operated to detect the presence of microorganisms. In a specific embodiment, the visual camera 38 comprises a fluorescent optical camera that can detect bacteria and/or viruses that become fluorescent under ultraviolet radiation”, [0044] and Fig. 6) on the flexible substrate (2, Fig. 2) in order to detect the presence of microorganisms, specifically pathogens fluorescing under UV radiation from light sources (18, Fig. 2, see [0044]).
Modified De Kok and Bettles are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of flexible substrates having LEDs emitting therapeutic/disinfecting wavelengths.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the flexible substrate of modified De Kok by incorporating a sensing device such as an image sensor (i.e., visual camera) as taught by Bettles in order to check to see if the object/surface being disinfected contains microorganisms (Bettles, [0044]).
15. Claim 21 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over De Kok (US 20090204185 A1), further in view of Russell (US 6290713 B1), further in view of Tasaki (US 20230251477 A1), as applied to claim 14 above, further in view of Hayashi et al. (CN 105209570 A).
The De Kok/Russell/Tasaki combination teaches wherein the processor controls the output of radiation from the array of LEDs (De Kok, [0040]), but fails to teach wherein the processor controls the output of radiation to maintain a surface temperature of the surface to be disinfected to be at least 45 degrees Celsius. It is important to note that there is no specific temperature range that De Kok’s control unit tries to maintain, and thus is silent to said range.
Hayashi teaches a UV LED array for the disinfection of fluid (Fig. 12a-b) controlled by a control unit (p.14, 1st paragraph of English translation), where the UV LEDs are mounted on a heat-conductive layer acting as a heat sink (MCPCB layer 104, Fig. 12b), stating that the UV LEDs have an optimal and most efficient working temperature range of 20-60°C (p.14, 2nd paragraph of English translation).
The De Kok/Russell/Tasaki combination and Hayashi are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of temperature regulation of the UV LEDs for disinfection.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the cooling channels of Russell and temperature sensors connected the control unit of De Kok of the De Kok/Russell/Tasaki combination by incorporating an optimal working temperature of the LEDs such as 45°C from the 20-60°C range as taught by Hayashi, because in doing so would provide the most optimal working temperature for the UV LEDs in the apparatus, thus increasing its efficiency (Hayashi, p.14, 2nd paragraph of English translation).
16. Claims 23-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over De Kok (US 20090204185 A1), further in view of Russell (US 6290713 B1), further in view of Tasaki (US 20230251477 A1), as applied to claim 14 above, further in view of Bettles et al. (US 20140264076 A1, cited in prior office action).
Regarding claim 23, modified De Kok teaches a flexible substrate (15, Fig. 5);
with LEDs (14 and 20, Fig. 5) controlled by a processor (control unit 11, Fig. 5), but fails to teach a proximity sensor operationally coupled to the processor, wherein the processor deactivates the array of LEDs to stop the output of radiation when the proximity sensor detects a user within a proximity of the proximity sensor.
Bettles teaches a flexible UV device (Fig. 2), having a flexible substrate (2, Fig. 2), LEDs (UV radiation sources 18, Fig. 2, where “the ultraviolet radiation source 18 can include a high intensity ultraviolet lamp (e.g., a high intensity mercury lamp), an ultraviolet light emitting diode (LED)”, [0027]), and a processing unit (control system 16, Fig. 6, where Fig. 6 is a block diagram for the flexible substrate having a UV system). Bettles further teaches a sensing device (sensing device 38, Fig. 6, where “A sensing device 38 can include a sensor and/or a switch 38 to sense that an opening of the enclosure 14 is physically closed before the monitoring and/or control system 16 turns on the ultraviolet radiation source(s) 18.
Furthermore, the sensing device 38 can sense that biological activity (i.e., target bacteria) is present within the enclosure 14 before the monitoring and/or control system 16 turns on the ultraviolet radiation source(s) 18”, [0042]) on the flexible substrate (2, Fig. 2) in order to “avoid harming the user” ([0035]), user being the person that is using the UV device on the target.
Modified De Kok and Bettles are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of flexible substrates having LEDs emitting therapeutic/disinfecting wavelengths.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the flexible substrate of modified De Kok by incorporating a sensing device such as a proximity sensor as taught by Bettles in order to check to see if the user is not near or in the enclosure (Bettles, [0042]) and to avoid harming the user (Bettles, [0035]).
Regarding claim 24, modified De Kok teaches a flexible substrate (15, Fig. 5);
with LEDs (14 and 20, Fig. 5) controlled by a processor (control unit 11, Fig. 5), but fails to teach an image sensor operationally coupled to the processor, wherein the processor determines a type of the surface to be disinfected based on an image signal received from the image sensor.
Bettles teaches a flexible UV device (Fig. 2), having a flexible substrate (2, Fig. 2), LEDs (UV radiation sources 18, Fig. 2, where “the ultraviolet radiation source 18 can include a high intensity ultraviolet lamp (e.g., a high intensity mercury lamp), an ultraviolet light emitting diode (LED)”, [0027]), and a processing unit (control system 16, Fig. 6, where Fig. 6 is a block diagram for the flexible substrate having a UV system). Bettles further teaches an image sensor operationally coupled to the processor (sensing devices 38 coupled to control system 16, Fig. 6), wherein the processor determines a type of a surface to be disinfected based on an image signal received from the image sensor (“the sensing devices 38 include at least one of a visual camera or a chemical sensor… For example, when the monitoring and/or control system 16 is operating the ultraviolet radiation source 18, a visual camera and/or a chemical sensor 38 monitoring an interior of the enclosure 14 may be operated to detect the presence of microorganisms. In a specific embodiment, the visual camera 38 comprises a fluorescent optical camera that can detect bacteria and/or viruses that become fluorescent under ultraviolet radiation”, [0044] and Fig. 6) on the flexible substrate (2, Fig. 2) in order to detect the presence of microorganisms, specifically pathogens fluorescing under UV radiation from light sources (18, Fig. 2, see [0044]).
Modified De Kok and Bettles are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of flexible substrates having LEDs emitting therapeutic/disinfecting wavelengths.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the flexible substrate of modified De Kok by incorporating a sensing device such as an image sensor (i.e., visual camera) as taught by Bettles in order to check to see if the object/surface being disinfected contains microorganisms (Bettles, [0044]).
Regarding claim 25, modified De Kok teaches a flexible substrate (15, Fig. 5);
with LEDs (14 and 20, Fig. 5) controlled by a processor (control unit 11, Fig. 5), but fails to teach an image sensor operationally coupled to the processor, wherein the processor: (i) determines a type of pathogen on the surface to be disinfected based on an image signal received from the image sensor, and (ii) controls the output of radiation based on the determined type of pathogen.
Bettles teaches a flexible UV device (Fig. 2), having a flexible substrate (2, Fig. 2), LEDs (UV radiation sources 18, Fig. 2, where “the ultraviolet radiation source 18 can include a high intensity ultraviolet lamp (e.g., a high intensity mercury lamp), an ultraviolet light emitting diode (LED)”, [0027]), and a processing unit (control system 16, Fig. 6, where Fig. 6 is a block diagram for the flexible substrate having a UV system). Bettles further teaches an image sensor operationally coupled to the processor (sensing devices 38 coupled to control system 16, Fig. 6), wherein the processor: (i) determines a type of pathogen on a surface to be disinfected based on an image signal received from the image sensor (“the sensing devices 38 include at least one of a visual camera or a chemical sensor… For example, when the monitoring and/or control system 16 is operating the ultraviolet radiation source 18, a visual camera and/or a chemical sensor 38 monitoring an interior of the enclosure 14 may be operated to detect the presence of microorganisms. In a specific embodiment, the visual camera 38 comprises a fluorescent optical camera that can detect bacteria and/or viruses that become fluorescent under ultraviolet radiation”, [0044] and Fig. 6, where fluorescing pathogens are a type of pathogen), and
(ii) controls the output of radiation based on the determined type of pathogen in order to detect the presence of microorganisms (“the sensing devices 38 can sense locations of higher levels of biological activity on specific items 8 within the enclosure 14, and the ultraviolet radiation source 18 can be configured by the monitoring and/or control system 16 to direct higher doses (by increasing intensity or exposure), [0045] and Fig. 6), specifically pathogens fluorescing under UV radiation from light sources (18, Fig. 2, see [0044]).
Modified De Kok and Bettles are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of flexible substrates having LEDs emitting therapeutic/disinfecting wavelengths.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the flexible substrate of modified De Kok by incorporating a sensing device such as an image sensor (i.e., fluorescent optical camera) as taught by Bettles in order to check to see if the object/surface being disinfected contains fluorescing microorganisms (from UV radiation) and adjust the light sources accordingly (Bettles, [0044-0046]).
Conclusion
17. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Aham Lee whose telephone number is (703)756-5622. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Thursday, 10:00 AM - 8:00 PM EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Maris R. Kessel can be reached at (571) 270-7698. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Aham Lee/Examiner, Art Unit 1758
/MARIS R KESSEL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1758
Prosecution Insights